Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Axiom of regularity
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Regularity, the cumulative hierarchy, and types == In ZF it can be proven that the class <math display="inline"> \bigcup_{\alpha} V_\alpha </math>, called the [[von Neumann universe]], is equal to the class of all sets. This statement is even equivalent to the axiom of regularity (if we work in ZF with this axiom omitted). From any model which does not satisfy the axiom of regularity, a model which satisfies it can be constructed by taking only sets in <math display="inline"> \bigcup_{\alpha} V_\alpha </math>. Herbert Enderton{{sfn|Enderton|1977|loc=p. 206}} wrote that "The idea of rank is a descendant of Russell's concept of ''type''". Comparing ZF with [[type theory]], [[Alasdair Urquhart]] wrote that "Zermelo's system has the notational advantage of not containing any explicitly typed variables, although in fact it can be seen as having an implicit type structure built into it, at least if the axiom of regularity is included.<ref>The details of this implicit typing are spelled out in {{harvnb|Zermelo|1930}}, and again in {{harvnb|Boolos|1971}}.</ref>{{sfn|Urquhart|2003|p=305}} Dana Scott{{sfn|Scott|1974}} went further and claimed that: {{Blockquote|The truth is that there is only one satisfactory way of avoiding the paradoxes: namely, the use of some form of the ''theory of types''. That was at the basis of both Russell's and Zermelo's intuitions. Indeed the best way to regard Zermelo's theory is as a simplification and extension of Russell's. (We mean Russell's ''simple'' theory of types, of course.) The simplification was to make the types ''cumulative''. Thus mixing of types is easier and annoying repetitions are avoided. Once the later types are allowed to accumulate the earlier ones, we can then easily imagine ''extending'' the types into the transfinite—just how far we want to go must necessarily be left open. Now Russell made his types ''explicit'' in his notation and Zermelo left them ''implicit''. [emphasis in original]}} In the same paper, Scott shows that an axiomatic system based on the inherent properties of the cumulative hierarchy turns out to be equivalent to ZF, including regularity.{{sfn|LΓ©vy|2002|p=73}}
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Axiom of regularity
(section)
Add topic